I noticed for sometime that UA did not light up there tails at night. With the dark paintjob UA planes are black holes roving around the airport at night. I finally asked a pilot who told me that UA eliminated the lights years ago in a cost cutting measure. I think its time to replace those bulbs and get some free advertising.

Well there are other lights that are lit on, underneath and around the plane that make it visible. So the tail light isn't on? Big deal. Obviously, if the FAA didn't deem it safe then UAL wouldn't do it.

I'm not saying that it's an excellent idea on United's part. But it is pretty acceptable.

Its better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air than be in the air wishing you were on the ground. Fly safe!

I've also heard the reason for tail lights was purely to advertise the airlines logo, not as a safety requirement. All the a/c in our fleet of DC10's/Boeings/Airbuses have them, except for 4 of our 757's - which were ex-Eastern aircraft, and I believe around the 2nd,3rd,4th & 5th off the production line

FINALLY SOME ONE POINTS THIS OUT ! , i use to watch UA744 depart from AKL for LAX at about 8-9 pm ....which is pitch black and they never seem to have any lights on at all....so i could never got the reg of UA .....maybe its about time they either buy some light bulbs or change there c/s !

UPS does not use logo lights. They are deactivated. This was done because it wasn't necessary to waste money on bulbs (they cost alot more than $5.00 as stated by a previous poster). UPS leaves from the cargo ramps @ most airports. These are typically nowhere near the passenger terminal. Even if they were they are so well lit you can see it's UPS. How many spotters are out taking photo's at night anyhow? The logo lights are usless for UPS.

Logo lights are a big waste of money. The bulbs burn out often (cost is $30-$50), use up precious maintenance man hours (MD-11's take about two hours to replace) and are another exterior light which could cause a flight delay (exterior lights are the #1 mtc. delay item at DL). I agree that they do look cool, but if I see one on, I'll go up and turn it off.

Everyday there are 2 UA B744s that fly into Singapore from the US and never once I saw any of their B744s have at least one logo light turned on. Some of them even have their runway turnoff lights burned out!

well, if you're a UAL pilot at O'Hare, at night, and the controller says 'Follow Company Seven-Five to taxiway Tango,' those tail illumination bulbs...probably the equal to a McDonald's Value Meal #6 in cost...would help out. I'm with the earlier poster who brought up the incursion factor. Even if you're not a UAL pilot at O'Hare, but rather a pilot for some other carrier, you'd want to be sure you were looking at the right plane if the controller said to follow some 'black' 757 from taxiway to taxiway.

This really isn't a saftey issue. I knew that when I wrote the post. I didn't realize how much logo lights cost. 30 to 50 dollars per bulb times 2 on every plane in the fleet. UA has How many planes in the fleet? Roughly 500, so lets slit the difference and say the buld cost $40x1000 thats $40,000 plus add in the extra bulds for inventory and the labor to reactivate and replace the bulbs when they burn out.

I'd rather have my retro check so I change my mind this really insn't free advertising.

chrisnh,
when you sit in a dark room while you taxi, you probably don't have that big of problem seeing the company jet right in front of you. While WE sit in the cabin and the lights are dimmed somewhat, we have a problem seeing the planes out our little portal, they don't have that same problem.

united has a cool paint scheme(IMO) and who cares if they don't turn their logo lights on. I would like it, that's UAL and remember we are hurting right now.